Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

7 April 2026 10:54 AM IST

  • Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench
    Listen to this Article

    A 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court will start hearing the Constitutional issues referred to the larger bench in the Sabarimala review.

    Apart from CJI Surya Kant, the Bench comprises Justice BV Nagarathna, Justice MM Sundresh, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice Augustine George Masih, Justice Prasanna B Varale, Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.

    The seven questions before the Supreme Court are :

    (i) What is the scope and ambit of right to freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India?

    (ii) What is the inter-play between the rights of persons under Article 25 of the Constitution of India and rights of religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution of India?

    (iii) Whether the rights of a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution of India are subject to other provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India apart from public order, morality and health?

    (iv) What is the scope and extent of the word 'morality' under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India and whether it is meant to include Constitutional morality?

    (v) What is the scope and extent of judicial review with regard to a religious practice as referred to in Article 25 of the Constitution of India?

    (vi) What is the meaning of expression “Sections of Hindus” occurring in Article 25 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India?

    (vii) Whether a person not belonging to a religious denomination or religious group can question a practice of that religious denomination or religious group by filing a PIL?

    Follow this page for live updates.

    Live Updates

    • 7 April 2026 2:57 PM IST

      SG: there is where dargah committee judgment goes wrong- integral part of religion and not the essential part.

    • 7 April 2026 2:49 PM IST

      SG: 26(b) as per shirur mutt is a standalone provision and can't be interfered with.

    • 7 April 2026 2:38 PM IST

      SG: see the composition of the bench because Ratilal Gandhi, which is two days later.

      In shirur mutt a direction was issued for creating a scheme under hindu endowement act and the act was also under challenged. two proceedings filed- one suit and another writ petition.

    • 7 April 2026 2:37 PM IST

      SG: refers to Shirur Mutt case: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1430396/

    • 7 April 2026 1:09 PM IST

      to be continued post lunch.

    • 7 April 2026 1:09 PM IST

      J Nagarathna: worship is a manifestation and article 25 is related to conscience and therefore related but article 26 is totally different

    • 7 April 2026 1:09 PM IST

      SG: My argument is neither is superior, it has to be purposive interpretation

    • 7 April 2026 1:09 PM IST

      SG: constitutional morality is a political doctrine

      J Bagchi: that is why, I asked what would be the import of subject to other-Article 17 you have addressed but there is Article 15. That is why, equality can't be taken away on the grounds of sex. But if you see article 26, it is not subject to. we are fully aware that it has to be compatible

    • 7 April 2026 1:00 PM IST

      J Nagarathna: how does article 26 apply?

      SG: sorry to say, 20-30 pages written on article 17

      J Sundresh: we need not to go into sabarimala

    • 7 April 2026 12:59 PM IST

      J Nagarathna: in the context of sabarimala controversy, how is article 26 relevant?

      SG: their arguments was it is a religious denomination.

      J Nagarathna: the temple is open to all hindus

      SG: argument was it is a denominational temple and the court said its not. article 26(b) was placed to argue that it can manage its affairs- court said its not a denomination and 26(b) has been given an expansive meaning

    Next Story